Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutboa_04 16 1962LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES DATE: April 16, 1962 TIME: 2:00 P. M. PLACE: Chamber of the Board of Directors MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Scott Farrell Mr. William R. Meeks Miss Emily Penton Mr, Maxwell J. Lyons, II, Chairman MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr, W. H. Marak STAFF PRESENT: Mr. Henry M. de Noble Mrs. Jackie 'Cooper Mr. Julius Breckling A quorum was present and the chairman called the meeting to order III. New Matters (Advertised) Docket No, 24-62 Applicant: Duane McKim Location: 2824 Walker Street Description: Lot 1, Block 80, John Barrow Addition Classification: "A" One -family District Variance: From the front and side yard provisions of Section 11, Ord. 5420, to permit construction of bedrooms Mr. McKim was present to represent his application. He told the Board that he was planning to construct either two bedrooms or one bedroom and a den. Mr. Breckling explained that his reason for asking for a variance that the existing building was too close to the front property line and side property line. There were no objectors present: In executive session a motion was made to approve this proposal. The motion was seconded and carried unanimously, Docket No. 25-62 Applicant: J. W. Osborne Location: 222 North Woodrow Street Description: Lot 1 and the North 1/2 of Lot 2, Block 5, Midland Hills Addition Classification: "B" Residence District Variance: From all applicable provisions of Section 11, Ord. 5420 to permit addition of carport, storage area, enclosed porch and bath. Mr, and Mrs, Osborne were present to represent this application. Problem is two main structures on a lot and a half. Mr. Osborne explained that both houses are on Page 2of4 the same plot of ground and that just back of one a storage room and a garage exist. He said they would like to make it like it originally was and add a carport at the side, Mr. Osborne said the adjacent property owners were all for it. Mr. Farrell asked if they lived at this location, the answer was yes. Mr. Farrell asked if it would be possible to save the large trees and Mr. Osborne said there was no parking in front of house and they would have to take down the trees. They said what they wanted to do would inhance the looks of the property. Mr. Farrell asked if it would be possible to make it all one building and Mr. Osborne said the one on front is 75' X 90' and that he thought it would be better to separte the two buildings. Mrs. Osborne said they had already began work on redecorating the inside and were almost through. She said the house looked like a new one on the inside. There were no objectors present. In executive session a motion was made that this application be approved provided that the single carport is constructed as shown on the plot plan. The motion was seconded and carried unanimously. Docket No. 26-62 Applicant: Jimmy J. Thompson Location: 6808 Cloverdale Drive Description: Lot 128, Cloverdale Addition Classification: "D" Apartment District Variance: From the rear yard provisions of Section 11, Ord. 5420 to permit construction of a den Mr. Breckling explained that the building was too close to the side property line and he said the Cloverdale bill of assurance called for six feet of side yard. There were no objectors present. In executive session a motion was made to approve this application. The motion was seconded and carried unanimously. Docket No. 27-62 Applicant: Jett Ricks Location: Southeast corner of "B" and Taylor Streets Description: Lots 1 and 2, Block 12, Pfeifer Addition Classification: "D" Apartment District Variance: From the area requirements of Sec. 12, Ord. 5420 to permit 10 units Mr. Ricks was present to represent this application. Mr. Breckling said that at this location he did not have enough lot area for a 10 unit apartment. He said that he lacked approximately 135 square feet for these 10 units. Mr. Ricks said he had dis- cussed the parking spaces with the traffic engineer, Mr. de Noble. It was pointed out that he had 10 parking spaces which is the required amount for a 10 unit building. Mr Farrell asked if "B" Street would be closed. Julius said he thought it should be. There were no objectors present. 5 Page 3 of 4 In executive session a motion was made to approve this application with the provision that the parking is in accordance with the City's Rules and Regulations. Mr. Meeks disqualified himself in the voting. The motion was seconded and carried. Docket No._28-62 Applicant: Glenn T. Holland Location: 7608 Cantrell Road Descriptions Lot 3, part of 5, 13 and 14, Block 2, Bellevue Addition (N . of Hwy. 10 ) Classification: "F" Commercial District Variances From all applicable provisions of Section 13, Ord: 5420 to permit construction of a building Mr; Hale was present to represent this case for Mr. Holland and himself. He said that he and Mr, Holland were working together on this. It was pointed out that there were several buildings on the tract of land in question. Mr. Hale told the Board that presently two double units, one single unit, six roam house and double garage e.ci.sted on the tract and that they had in mind a building that could be used for a business building facing "T" Street for duplexes. Mr, Hale told the Board that he was half owner. There were no objectors present. In executive session the motion was made to deny this application because of the many units on this tract of land. The motion was seconded and carried unanimously. IV, Continued Matters Docket No. 18-62 Applicant: Location: Description° Classification: Variance* M, M. Eberts American Legion Post No. 1 911 Scott Street The South 1/2 of Lot 3, Original City "E" Apartment District all of lot 4, Block 25 From Section 18-4 Ord. 5420, to permit the location of a parking lot in a restricted district. Mr: Breckling explained that this application had been before the Board at the last meeting but that action had been deferred until the property owners were properly notified_ Mr. and Mrs. Lightcap were present were present9 They said they had heard nothing about it and that they lived right next door. They said they had no objection to a private parking lot but that they would object to a commercial parking lot. Mr. Lightcap said it was just his nature to complain. He said he felt that they had a right to know who was putting in a parking lot. Mr. Block told them that the Masonic Lodge would be using it for private parking. Mrs. Lightcap said that what they wanted to know was whether it would be a private or commercial parking lot- fir_ Lightcap said that a Mr. Phillips was against it and that he would always be against it and that he would be here today. Mr. Lyons explained that the only way the Board had of knowing when the people objected was if they wrote an objection to the planning staff or appeared at the public hearing on the property. He said if they did not object in one of those two ways that the Board just assumed they were for it. He also explained. that if the Board approved the application for private parking the appli- cation would have to come back before the Board to change it to commercial parking, Page 4 of 4 In executive session Mr. Phillips stated his objection. He siad that he lived at 922-924 Cumberland Street. Mr. Meeks asked Mr. Phillips where the Lightcaps lived. He said that they lived about 912 or 914 Cumberland. He said that once a blood bank was there but is probably vacated now. He said that this parking lot would be Ninth and Scott and that the Masonic Lodge was at seventh and Scott, two blocks away. Mr. Farrell asked Mr. Phillips if there were any large trees on this property. Mr. Phillips said no. In executive session a motion was made to approve this application provided that the parking lot is used only by the Masonic Lodge and also that curbs, gutters, etc., are constructed in accordance with the rules and regulations of the city. The motion was seconded and carried. Docket No. 20-62 Applicant: Mrs. Ruth Crews Location: 1522 Louisiana Description: Lot 7, Block 186, Original City Classification: "E" Apartment Variance: From the rear yard provisions of Section 12, Ord. 5420 to permit occupancy and rental of storage building Mrs. Crews was not on the agenda for the meeting, however she did appear in executive session and Mr. Lyons asked her to please step up before the Board. Mrs. Crews was asked if she had any other additional proposal on the structure. She said all she could think of was to move it and join it to rest of the house. She said she could not get a contractor to quote her a price until they knew she had permission from the Board to go on. She said, however, if she did move it and join it to the rest of the house it would create an eyesore from the property next to her. Mrs. Crews asked the Board if they could give her 18 months to use it until she could get it paid for, Mrs. Crews said that she had three rooms and a bath in the house. Living room, bedroom and kitchen. She said if she could rent it for eighteen months and get it paid for then she could go. There were no objectors present. In executive session a motion was made to defer action, on this proposal until further study was made of the case by the Board. The motion was seconded and carried unan- imously. The meeting adjourned at 3:07 P.M. Jackie Cooper, Secretary APPROVED Maxwell J. Lyons II, Chairman